Latest Cases

Town and country planning – Local government. The second defendant local authority refused the claimant retrospective planning permission for the construction of an extension and issued an enforcement notice in respect of the same. The planning inspector, appointed by the first defendant Secretary of State, refused the claimant's appeal against the refusal and the enforcement notice. The claimant challenged the refusal under s 288(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (the Act) and appealed the enforcement notice under s 289 of the Act. The Planning Court, in refusing the application and dismissing the appeal, held that there had not been any error of law. 

Contract – Construction. The claimant lenders brought a claim against the defendant borrowers on the basis of a personal loan agreement. The defendants challenged the authenticity of the purported load agreement. The Queen's Bench Division held that the claimants had failed to discharge the burden that the agreement was what it purported to be and, accordingly, the action failed and would be dismissed. 

Unfair dismissal – Constructive dismissal. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) allowed the employee's appeal against the employment tribunal's decisions regarding the employee's claims for unfair constructive dismissal and race discrimination. The EAT decided that both those decisions had been in error on the basis that, in respect of the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal had not set out its reasons, and in respect of the race discrimination claim, the tribunal had failed to deal with a specific argument addressed to it. Accordingly, the matter was remitted for rehearing by a fresh tribunal. 

Employment tribunal – Striking out. The employment tribunal dismissed the employee's application to vary an unless order and refused to give her relief from sanctions with the result that her case was struck out following her non-compliance with the order. The tribunal further refused her permission to raise new unlawful direct race discrimination claims. In dismissing her appeal against those decisions, the Employment Appeal Tribunal decided that there had been no error of law in the tribunal's order or its approach. 

Employment tribunal – Striking out. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in dismissing the employee's appeal against the employment tribunal's decision to strike out his case, ruled that the tribunal had been correct in its decision to strike out the employee's claims on the basis that they lacked merit. 

Employment tribunal – Procedure. The employment tribunal had dismissed a claim for, amongst other things, unfair dismissal, by the employee teacher against a local authority and the interim executive board of the school (the board) where the employee had worked. The tribunal had dismissed the claim against the authority on jurisdictional grounds on the basis that the correct respondent had been the board. It had further dismissed the claim against the board as it had been out of time. The Employment Appeal Tribunal, in allowing the employee's appeal, held that: (i) the time limit had been a factor in the court's discretion, rather than an automatic bar; and (ii) it could not be said that the authority had definitely not been liable. 

Conflict of laws – Jurisdiction. In an application seeking to set aside an order giving the claimant permission to serve out of the jurisdiction, the Chancery Division found, inter alia, that the claimant had not established that, in the absence of an English law contract, a claim under the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993, SI 1993/3053, could be brought within certain of the gateways under CPR Pt 6. 

Employment tribunal – Procedure. Applying the approach in Mensah v East Hertfordshire NHS Trust [1998] IRLR 531 , the Employment Appeal Tribunal (the EAT) dismissed the employee's appeal, upholding the employment tribunal's finding that the employee's claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination were time-barred as they had been filed beyond the three-month limitation period. 

Professional misconduct – Medical practitioner. The appellant was a nurse. In October 2012, the appellant pleaded guilty to two charges of fraud. As a result of the convictions, the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) brought disciplinary proceedings against the appellant. A panel of the Conduct and Competence Committee of the NMC (the panel) ruled that the appellant's fitness to be practise had been impaired and ordered that she be struck off. The appellant appealed against the sanction imposed. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the panel was entitled to conclude that no sanction short of striking off would be appropriate. 

Employment tribunal – Procedure. The employee applied for leave to amend his Notice of Appeal which sought to include a challenge to the employment tribunal's rejection of the employee's claim to retrospective admission to the Teachers Pension Scheme on the basis that there had not been a 'stable employment relationship' between the parties. Applying Khudados v Leggate and others [2005] IRLR 540 and considering the overriding objective of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993, SI 1993/2854 (as amended by the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993, SI 2013/1693) to deal with cases justly and fairly, the Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed the employee's application.